• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

What's Your Preference: 2D or 3D Zelda?

What's Your Preference: 2D or 3D Zelda?

  • 2D Zelda

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 3D Zelda

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Both Are Equally Stellar

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1

JuicieJ

SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Location
On the midnight Spirit Train going anywhere
Let's take the one factor that always has bothered me; 3D Zelda lacks magic meters most of the time. The 2D game have always had an assortment of items - or spells - that require magic to use. This has added another element to the game that increased the difficulty; some dungeons required these magic-taxing items frequently. The lack of these types of things in 3D Zeldas were ridiculous; Skyward Sword could have utilized it for sure.

What? The only 2D Zeldas to use magic are Zelda II and ALttP. LoZ, LA, the OoX, FS, FSA, MC, PH, and ST do not have Magic Meters in any shape, form, or fashion. LA may have Magic Powder and the Magic Rod, but they don't require any use of magical powers. They're just basic items. Same with the Fire Rod in FSA (idk if it's in FS). The fact that three of the 3D titles -- which is 3 out of 5, making it have magic more often than not, contrary to what you claimed -- use magic also makes this even more confusing. With this logic, you should be saying you prefer the 3D titles over the 2D. There's a significant lack of magic in the 2D titles, especially when compared to the 3D ones.

The next thing is the overall difficulty. I feel that a number of factors affected this. One of the most notable reasons is the lack of significant hints in the 2D games; the few guides that Link encountered in the 2D Zeldas offered little advice. The 3D Zeldas however, have guides that badger you constantly with helpful hints - many of which that people find to be exceptionally annoying. I don't think anyone has complained about hints in 2D Zeldas, and there's a good reason for that.

MC, PH, and ST are all pretty easy and each have a partner of some sort that offer advice. These are 2D titles, and they're the latest ones, to boot. That makes them more prevalent to this discussion, meaning that you should be referring to the classic 2D titles in this case, not 2D Zelda in general.

Enemies also added to the overall difficulty of 2D Zeldas. The AIs were far more simple back then, and yet, the enemies were a lot harder to defeat than 3D ones. Granted, 3D ones end up being more laborious to defeat, but taking time to kill an enemy is not always due to difficulty. The sheer quantity of enemies in 2D Zeldas contribute to this difficulty as well. There are so many lurking in the overworld - and dungeons - that each and every last heart that you obtain may end up saving you from seeing that "Game Over" screen.

I don't know about the OoX or FS, but the only 2D Zelda games I've ever had legitimate trouble with enemy-wise are the first three. LA, FSA, MC, PH, and ST all had pretty simple enemies that didn't take much to defeat at all, even in mass quantities. Once again, I think you should be referring only to the classic 2D titles (save LA) in this case.

Bosses were also far more difficult to defeat. 3D Zelda bosses boast size and girth, but 2D Zelda bosses boast intelligence and cunning. I doubt that everyone here can say that the size of the boss in comparison to the room itself made it far more difficult to avoid attacks. In 3D Zeldas, you're forced to run in a circle around the perimeter while waiting for an open spot to attack. 2D Zeldas do not offer such luxuries. I have died many more times in 2D Zelda boss fights than 3D ones.

All except for PH and ST. Actually, even MC had a bit of the 3D boss design to it.

A lot of effort? You mean the same amount that they did with 2D, but with more resources and power to put the games in 3D? I don't think, had they tried hard enough, they could have made the original Legend of Zelda in 3D.

What makes you say that? I don't see any reason to believe they couldn't have done this.
 
Last edited:

Ventus

Mad haters lmao
Joined
May 26, 2010
Location
Akkala
Gender
Hylian Champion
What? The only 2D Zeldas to use magic are Zelda II and ALttP. LoZ, LA, the OoX, FS, FSA, MC, PH, and ST do not have Magic Meters in any shape, form, or fashion. LA may have Magic Powder and the Magic Rod, but they don't require any use of magical powers. They're just basic items. Same with the Fire Rod in FSA (idk if it's in FS). The fact that three of the 3D titles -- which is 3 out of 5, making it have magic more often than not, contrary to what you claimed -- use magic also makes this even more confusing. With this logic, you should be saying you prefer the 3D titles over the 2D. There's a significant lack of magic in the 2D titles as compared to the 3D.
Pretty much this in response to GD's claims against 3D Magic, but I do agree with Keef that 3D Zeldas are seriously lacking in magic use.

Anywho, to nitpick in favor of Keef,
LoZ has the candle which is somewhat magical
OoX has the Magic Boomerang, and this is obviously magical (seriously, you can control the path the boomerang goes --literally-- for a limited time), as well as the Magical Rings, and their effects are quite magical.
FS...I don't think FS has anything. Not to my knowledge, anyway (I recently played FS). The Gnat Hat is magical.
FSA...the fire rod.
TMC has the uhm...the Pegasus Boots, the ability to turn into a minish, Cane of Pacci, etc.
PH, idk
ST, idk

All of those games have magic inclined items, and their uses are rather prominent. Not to the degree of other items, that's for sure, but far beyond say the likes of the Dominion Rod of Twilight Princess.
***​

I'd like to amend my original post, actually. I now prefer the 2D genre of Zelda to the 3D genre, but this has nothing to do with what games I like and dislike -- OoT will forever be my number one favorite and I'm pretty sure SS will always be my least favorite...wait no, it isn't even on my favoritism scale. :right:

Anywho, the 2D side of Zelda has many boons:
- Puzzles
- Difficulty (not challenge, I mean straight up difficulty)
- Item Satisfaction


For puzzles, I'd like to quickly copy paste a section from Ganondork's post:
Small things have stumped me in 2D dungeons for days on end, before I finally take a small guess, and end up being correct.
This is something that I truly miss from the 2D era. I mean, Majora's Mask has a bunch of little things that keep me from breezing through its dungeons, and I often forget the layout of most Master Quest dungeons (seriously, I clip through like...all of MQ dungeons whenever I can haha), but those are only two of the six [six if you count MQ as a separate 3D installment] 3D games. 3D games just haven't stumped me, like at all, whereas 2D games will keep me stuck and confused at the very least 40% of the time. This needs to happen in 3D games, but I don't know if Nintendo can do it.

As for difficulty, come on this is easily evident. In the earlier games, enemies dealt damage (this isn't to say 3D enemies don't, but listen for a sec)...the thing is, enemies also can hit you to actually deal that damage. Even the most experienced player has to watch out for basic contact by a flippin' Keese or other similar enemy. However, the most experienced player only needs to watch out for the telegraphed attacks by a 3D enemy in order to bypass it. I'm not saying contact damage needs to return, as when you get down to it, the fact is that 3D games are at least semi-realistic as far as their damage goes. I'm just saying that enemies in 3D games need more ways of dealing damage, and quicker ones at that. 2D wins this forte as well.

And finally, item satisfaction. Now, what I mean by this term is an odd duck of sorts. By item satisfaction, I mean what you get out of that item even existing. In most 3D games, you get an item for about one specific uses only. For example, the Double Clawshots in Skyward Sword are pretty much used to get from point A to point B, no questions asked. The spell Farore's Wind in Ocarina of Time, as much as I hate to say it, is used as a "quicksave" option and nothing more. There are few novelty items that really mean anything. In the 2D games, though, items can do quite a bit. The boomerang can kill some enemies, retrieve some irretrievable drops, stun other enemies, and sometimes even hit switches. The bow is an all purpose item. The magic cape, while completely optional, can help you traverse friggin pitfalls!

You easily get more bang for your buck as far as 2D items go versus their 3D counterparts, at least in my opinion.

So there, I now prefer 2D over 3D Zelda, concepts at least.
 

Ganondork

goo
Joined
Nov 12, 2010
JuicieJ said:
With this logic, you should be saying you prefer the 3D titles over the 2D. There's a significant lack of magic in the 2D titles, especially when compared to the 3D ones.

Not really. The significance of the Magic Meter in Majora's Mask and Wind Waker are next to nothing. Majora's Mask is for a few abilities with the transformations masks - aka not very much at all. Wind Waker used it for special arrows, the magic armor, and the deku leaf. The most used of the three would be the leaf, and even that is used less than the assorted magic items used in A Link to the Past and Adventure of Link. Given my forgetting about Majora's Mask and Ocarina of Time having magic meters, you also have to consider quality over quantity. A Link to the Past used dungeons that revolved around specific magic-based items; I don't recall any 3D titles doing the same. And then of course, I believe the Oracle Series should have contained magic meters, as Oracle of Ages did in fact require a magic-based item used in A Link to the Past.

MC, PH, and ST are all pretty easy and each have a partner of some sort that offer advice. These are 2D titles, and they're the latest ones, to boot. That makes them more prevalent to this discussion, meaning that you should be referring to the classic 2D titles in this case, not 2D Zelda in general.

I can't speak for the last two - as I have not started Spirit Tracks, nor gotten far in Phantom Hourglass - but Ezlo offers very useful advice - when severely needed - and few people have ever compared him to Navi, or your oh-so-precious Fi. Out of curiosity, why is Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks still considered 2D? They have the camera angle like a 3D one - using my limited knowledge of Phantom Hourglass.

I don't know about the OoX or FS, but the only 2D Zelda games I've ever had legitimate trouble with enemy-wise are the first three. LA, FSA, MC, PH, and ST all had pretty simple enemies that didn't take much to defeat at all, even in mass quantities. Once again, I think you should be referring only to the classic 2D titles (save LA) in this case.

Oracle of Seasons focuses on combat. Some of the bosses gave me significant trouble, so I would say that this is, in fact, applies. Can't really speak for the others.

All except for PH and ST. Actually, even MC had a bit of the 3D boss design to it.

So Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks can be considered a 3D title. Thanks for already answering my question above within your own reply. So sections of some of your points would be considered invalid since they crossed into 3D territory, correct? What boss fights had 3D designs in Minish Cap?

What makes you say that? I don't see any reason to believe they couldn't have done this.

So you're bashing Nintendo for lacking the technology to create 3D prior to all of its other series'? How exactly does this work? Apparently effort now is equivalent to the means, resources, and technology to produce a video game into 3 dimensions prior to the release of consoles such as the Nintendo 64 which could make 3D games.
 

Ventus

Mad haters lmao
Joined
May 26, 2010
Location
Akkala
Gender
Hylian Champion
Majora's Mask is for a few abilities with the transformations masks - aka not very much at all.

So you're bashing Nintendo for lacking the technology to create 3D prior to all of its other series'? How exactly does this work? Apparently effort now is equivalent to the means, resources, and technology to produce a video game into 3 dimensions prior to the release of consoles such as the Nintendo 64 which could make 3D games.
*Ahem* Transformation masks as well as elemental arrows with substantiated effects. MM may not have the quantity of magic use as the 2D games, but the quality itself is up there with at the very least ALttP.

Wait, when did JJ even insinuate this? I'm not speaking for him, but I'm pretty sure what he read was
Ganondork in the imaginary world said:
Nintendo cannot make LoZ in 3D even if they tried.
whereas what you said was
Ganondork said:
I don't think, had they tried hard enough, they could have made the original Legend of Zelda in 3D.
. Really, I'd put the fault here on the way you structured your sentence; without a 2nd or 3rd review of your sentence, it comes off as you saying "I don't think they can make the original in 3D", even if you take context in consideration. I know that is what I figured when I first read your post.
 

Ronin

There you are! You monsters!
Forum Volunteer
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Location
Alrest
Third-Dimensional games have always been my proclivity in that, aesthetically, everything is lifelike and more pleasing to the oculus. Contrary to the bird's-eye view of A Link to the Past and the lateral perspective of Adventure of Link, all the 3D Zelda games displayed fully developed worlds that didn't look pixelated or lacking in definite constitution. Gameplay-wise I find that the 3D titles also feature more engaging combat and puzzles, thanks to the realism of the higher visual composition. Lastly, the story in the 3Ds are cinematically superior, because I'm able to perceive the emotions from the characters' faces and read the situations better as they unfold. In short, it all contributes more than just the text.

Somehow this all ties back to the graphics, which greatly makes up the difference from the 2D and 3D styles.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Location
CA, USA
I voted for both. I think both are equally engaging, a couple of years or even months ago I would have undoubtedly voted for 3D, but after diving into The Minish Cap and aLttP, I feel they are just as hard-hitting as 3D titles, and deliver just as much if not more. The Minish Cap has really grown on me after a couple more play throughs; Zelda 2D games are phenomenal and now I only have to play the Oracle games, which I'm having a hard time finding for a reasonable price.. :(

Equality for all Zelda games! 3D or not!
 

The Jade Fist

Kung Fu Master
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
2d after the NES
Sadly I don't think they'll make any more. Since phantom hour glass and spirit tracks (I count more as 3d, they are trying bridge the 2d and 3d, and I dont' like that as much)

But what can I do, they'll probably never go back to the true top down design, simply because they want it to look better. Now maybe if the PH/ST weren't all touch pad, I might have liked them alot more.
 

Awesome

The Creepy Uncle
Joined
Feb 10, 2012
Location
Swaggin Roost Island
I honestly couldn't care if the games are 2D or 3D. I love them both. I still want 2D Zelda games to be made as I feel they can do things that 3D Zelda can't and vise versa. Neither is better than the other, they're just different.
 

The Jade Fist

Kung Fu Master
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
I guess i could expand on it, while OoT/ Majora Mask remains my favorite 2 games, I feel the number of 2d games, being Links Awakeing/ Oracle Ages/ Oracle Season/ Link to the past, are 4 games, vs 2, as being amongst my favorites.

Now its not so much about the immersion with the 2d games which still did decently enough, but as much as about the gameplay that was just more fun as a whole.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2012
Location
hyrule castle town
2d zeldas are great but i preffer really 3d.2d zeldas dont have lots of features either sidequest or so but are mostly more difficult than the 3d zeldas cuz lots of puzzles in the dungeons that are more difficult in that style and fighting is definetely too. i like the 2d games cuz they're a bigger challenge than the other ones althought they're too short but the graphics,the fighting style and the feeling you have while playing in 3d cant be compered with 2d,the only thing they're far more easy.
 

Skywaker

Cheese & bacon potato
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Location
New Jersey
3D Zelda games have always been my preference. The graphics are immersive and very innovative. When I'm facing Link's perspective of view as I'm controlling him at the same time, it makes me feel as if I were the one adventuring in the game. 2D is just as great but I really stink at them. xD
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom